Posts: 6,419
Threads: 74
Joined: Mar 2002
Meh, the server is in Italy. Plus I doubt they want to spend time (equals money) to fight some nerd collecting their 15 years old products.
Btw, it's a repository. Repository means backup. You can't download if you didn't buy the originals. The downloader breaks the law, not the hoster.
Posts: 719
Threads: 42
Joined: Oct 2005
Guys...PDS is the name of the entire suite of tools, not just QB. QB 7 was just one of the tools included in the PDS package. QC was another...I don't remember what other compilers there were though.
\__/)
(='.'=) Copy bunny into your signature to
(")_(") help him gain world domination.
Posts: 29
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
Quote: The downloader breaks the law, not the hoster.
If that were true then the music industry wouldn't be able to sue people that shared music files.
Posts: 3,522
Threads: 189
Joined: Dec 2003
Quote:Quote: The downloader breaks the law, not the hoster.
If that were true then the music industry wouldn't be able to sue people that shared music files.
It's true.
I can legaly put anything I want, anywhere, as long as it's on my own server. As in, I'm not sharing it.
If some "hacker" browse to my 100% open server and download the things I have there, not my fault..
All they can do is kindly ask me to increase security, to which I could reply: Sure, when we find time.
In short, dont actively share, and you're fine.
Besides, it's a bit different between 15yr old software and 6 month old music.
Noone care if you share 15yr old music either
Aaaaaanyways, I highly doubt MS will do something, and if they do.. you could just plead "ignorance" and say you'll remove it immediately.. It would cost more to go to court than to just warn you. Not only in money, but in publicity too..
And people are really starting to disslike MS strategy against piracy (DRM anyone?)
Posts: 6,419
Threads: 74
Joined: Mar 2002
Exactly. It would be costy for them, and really not worth the trouble - for them. I am causing no trouble to them, they are not selling those products. It's illegal, of course, but here the legality is really fuzzy. I'm providing backups, just that. If you don't own the original, just don't download. If you do, it's up to you. Easy as that.
In my country it's legal to have backups. If you break into my server and steal my files, it's not my fault. After all, the web is hosted in a subdirectory by no means linked from the main entrance, i.e., look for a link at http://www.ojodepez-fanzine.net ... You won't find it.
If I knew how to avoid google to index my page, I would do it.
Of course I will remove them if I'm asked for. But I'm sure nobody will complain. The page has been up for almost two years now. It's only known by people who hang around here, anyway.
Posts: 719
Threads: 42
Joined: Oct 2005
Quote:If that were true then the music industry wouldn't be able to sue people that shared music files.
They can't. What they CAN do though, and what they HAVE done, is use bully tactics and their multi-billion dollar deep pockets to engage in settlements against individuals who cannot afford a lawyer with the skill to fight off the RIAA. The day one person stands up to the RIAA is the day they are defeated.
\__/)
(='.'=) Copy bunny into your signature to
(")_(") help him gain world domination.
Posts: 3,522
Threads: 189
Joined: Dec 2003
Quote:Andrew Collins Wrote:If that were true then the music industry wouldn't be able to sue people that shared music files.
They can't. What they CAN do though, and what they HAVE done, is use bully tactics and their multi-billion dollar deep pockets to engage in settlements against individuals who cannot afford a lawyer with the skill to fight off the RIAA. The day one person stands up to the RIAA is the day they are defeated. Several people have stood up against them.. there was a case not too long ago in sweden (Not RIAA mind you) where a guy who shared some music walked.
Reason was that the record company no longer provided the music in any form. And as such, he keept it available as a backup.
Interessting case, though it's kind of obvious.
Companies who sue over products they no longer supply are just stupid, and deserve to go bankrupt. (Well, obvious exception if like.. the product can damage the company, such as the product being pure crap and poo.. and spreads a bad reputation.. then the company might wanna try and keep it away from people..  )
Posts: 6,419
Threads: 74
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 29
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
Quote:They can't.
Do a google search for "RIAA wins lawsuit" and "RIAA loses lawsuit"
You'll see the wins out weigh the losses.
Quote:Companies who sue over products they no longer supply are just stupid, and deserve to go bankrupt.
Doesn't matter. It's their property.
Personally I think any software over 5 years old should be freeware.
But what I think is irrelevant. That software belongs to the company or people that published it.
If it were your property (ANY of your property) and someone was giving it away without your permission would you be pissed?
As far as I'm concerned this discussion can't really go anyplace else, the original post has been answered. There is no new version of QB.
Thats all I really have to say.
Posts: 3,522
Threads: 189
Joined: Dec 2003
Quote:Quote:They can't.
Do a google search for "RIAA wins lawsuit" and "RIAA loses lawsuit"
You'll see the wins out weigh the losses.
Ofcourse, would you fight a multibillion dollar lawsuit against you? Would you be able to pay the lawyers?
Quote:Quote:Companies who sue over products they no longer supply are just stupid, and deserve to go bankrupt.
Doesn't matter. It's their property.
Personally I think any software over 5 years old should be freeware.
But what I think is irrelevant. That software belongs to the company or people that published it.
Ofcourse, however, when a company no longer distribute the product in any way. Thats when it gets silly. Imagine MS suing someone over QB today. All it would do is generate a bad reputation for them. And they would gain nothing, as they're not loosing customers by people illegaly distributing QB
Quote:If it were your property (ANY of your property) and someone was giving it away without your permission would you be pissed?
We're talking about software that is no longer being suported/distributed/or even acknowledged..
I wouldnt mind if, 20 years from now, someone started giving away some random game/program I made today. Infact I would take it as a compliment, as people like my program, even after 20 years.
Quote:As far as I'm concerned this discussion can't really go anyplace else, the original post has been answered. There is no new version of QB.
Thats all I really have to say.
You're too concerned about things.
|
